In the news recently several matters have come to the public attention involving certain public officials. Bulbs, buses, oil and land have all become hot topics for public discussion involving corruption.

Corruption, simply put, is where a public official takes money or goods paid for by a tax payer for his/her own benefit or that of his/her friends and patrons. Any act or omission done in the exercise of one's public function, where the result or intention is to obtain an unlawful benefit, and to use or hid that benefit, falls within the ambit of corruption.

Jamaica is rated by Transparency International only above Belize, Guyana and Haiti amongst our Caricom neighbours on its Corruption Perception Index, which measures the perception of corruption among the general populace in a country. Jamaica has a score of 3.3 on the said Index, which seems to support a widespread perception in our society that corruption is rampant. Whether it is the police officer giving someone a 'bly' on his traffic ticket in exchange for buying raffle tickets or the 'purchase' of a shiny new driver's licence from the friend of a friend who works at the depot, it is likely that some of us have encountered some form of corruption by a public functionary.

The relevant legislation is the Corruption Prevention Act, which does not expressly define the term "corruption" but identifies "acts of corruption", including where any public servant does any of the following:

(a) solicits or accepts, whether directly or indirectly, any article or money or other benefit, being a gift, favour, promise or advantage for himself or another person for doing any act or omitting to do any act in the performance of his public functions;

(b) in the performance of his public functions does any act or omits to do any act for the purpose of obtaining any illicit benefit for himself or any other person;

(c) fraudulently uses or conceals any property derived from any such act or omission to act.

The matter may be tried before the Supreme Court but is usually heard in the Resident Magistrate's Court. A first conviction for corruption before the Resident Magistrate's Court attracts a maximum fine not exceeding $1 million and/or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. If heard in the Supreme Court the maximum penalty is a fine not exceeding $5 million and/or imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years. In the Resident Magistrate's Court, the evidence is heard by a judge alone who will hear the evidence and come to a determination, whereas in the Supreme Court the matter is heard before a jury. The matter of which court will hear the matter is left to the sole discretion of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).

What is interesting to note, too, is that, not only is the public official who accepts a bribe liable for committing an offence, but so is the person who attempts to give a bribe to a public officer. Any person who derives a benefit from the corrupt act of a public servant could be held liable under the Act. There may be many traffic offenders who would be caught by this.

Robert Collie is an Associate at Myers, Fletcher & Gordon and is a member of the firm's property department. He may be contacted at robert.collie@mfg.com.jm

A technological 'stride' for exercise equipment

Get a flatter belly in just 20 minutes

Great guitar made easy